On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr> wrote:
> Le 30/11/2011 20:02, Tab Atkins Jr. a écrit :
>> This is being defined in Lists 3. It matches your definition, that
>> only the single-digit numbers are padded with zeros. (It's defined by
>> a @counter-style rule rather than prose, though.)
>
> So when Lists 3 is ready, it will make the matching parts of CSS 2.1
> obsolete and these parts won’t get corrections or clarifications?
Yes, unless there's something obviously wrong or confusing in 2.1.
Then we may fix 2.1 and have the correct text in a level 3 or higher
draft. Implementors are generally expected to be reading the most
updated version of the specs, so once a chunk of 2.1 has been pulled
into a separate module, it's largely irrelevant.
> Is it "ready" once it gets to CR?
Yes, generally. That should be forthcoming in the next several months
for Lists, if everything goes as planned.
> When parts of a spec is obsolete, should it be marked as such with a link to
> the new spec?
We haven't generally done so with 2.1. As I said above, implementors
are expected to be reading the most updated version of the specs.
This can be seen somewhat easily by looking at
http://dev.w3.org/csswg/, and will be even easier once we get the new
Current Work page back up, which lists all the specs by maturity
level.
~TJ